Poley United 0 - 9 Tidgeffol

Key Events:

• 4' Tidgeffol Henry Snyder scores, assisted by Luis Mendez
• 17' Tidgeffol Domingos Veiga scores, assisted by Luis Mendez
• 22' Yellow card to Tidgeffol Cristiano Da Luz
• 30' Tidgeffol Henry Snyder scores, assisted by Adrian Carrasco
• 31' Yellow card to Poley United Oumar Camara
• 32' Tidgeffol Adilson Martinho scores
• 42' Tidgeffol Henry Snyder scores, assisted by Luis Mendez
• 45' Tidgeffol Cristiano Da Luz scores
• 48' Yellow card to Poley United Walter Anderson
• 53' Tidgeffol Orlando Da Cruz scores
• 64' Yellow card to Tidgeffol Adilson Martinho
• 74' Tidgeffol scores, assisted by Henry Snyder
• 77' Yellow card to Tidgeffol Henry Snyder
• 89' Tidgeffol scores, assisted by Mansour Gaye

Expected Goals (xG) Analysis: Tidgeffol scored nine from an xG of 4.55, substantially exceeding the chance-quality estimate. That is notable finishing on top of a high volume of pressure: 21 shots, with 16 on target, gave the visitors repeated opportunities to turn their attacking advantage into goals. Poley United recorded an xG of 0.01 and no shots, so the gap was not simply a matter of one side finishing unusually well; Tidgeffol created the meaningful threat while Poley United could not produce an attempt. The hosts’ 56% possession and 86% pass accuracy make the contrast sharper, not kinder: they had more of the ball, but possession did not translate into forward danger.

• Poley United had no standout performers rated 7.0 or higher.

The final 0 - 9 reflects a match in which Tidgeffol converted its dominance into an emphatic result, while Poley United’s possession offered no route back into the contest. The nine goals exceeded the visitors’ xG by 4.45, so the finishing was exceptional even against the considerable weight of chances and shots. Tidgeffol also shared the scoring across six named goalscorers and two uncredited scorers in the event record; Henry Snyder and Luis Mendez supplied the most visible individual contributions. For Poley United, six corners and the greater share of possession could not compensate for a blank shot count. The match’s central oddity was plain: one side had more of the ball, and the other had almost all of the football that mattered.